SAME-SEX MARRIAGES (SSM) IN CANADA

Debates about SSM in Alberta

Sponsored link.

Overview:

The Province of Alberta is located immediately to the east of
British Columbia, Canada's most westerly province. It is north of the state
of Montana in the U.S. 1
Alberta and Prince Edward Island (PEI)probably have the largest percentage of conservative Protestants of
any province in Canada. These two provinces have demonstrated their low
regard for their gay and lesbian citizens on two occasions:

They were the last ones to declare
sexual orientation to be a protected class in their human rights
legislation.

By mid-2005, they were the only provinces where loving,
committed same-sex couples could not marry.

By mid-2005, same-sex couples were free to marry in eight of ten provinces of Canada -- British Columbia, Ontario, Manitoba,
New Brunswick, Newfoundland/Labrador, Nova Scotia, Quebec, and Saskatchewan. Same-sex marriage
was not permitted in two territories (Northwest Territory and Nunavut), and
in two provinces (Alberta and Prince Edward Island [PEI]). Same-sex couples there are in a legal limbo. The courts have decided that
the couples can marry, but the province appear to be refusing them marriage licenses
until ordered by a court.

On 2005-JUL-20, federal bill
C-38 was given royal assent. All jurisdictions in Canada were forced to issue
marriage licenses to same-sex couples, and to register their subsequent
marriages.

Statistics Canada estimates that
the 2004 population of Alberta is 3,201,900 persons. This represents very
slightly less than 10% of Canada's population. 2

Events related to same-sex marriage in Alberta:

2003-JUL-17: Poll shows slight majority opposed SSM: Ipsos-Reid
released the results of their poll of Albertan adults. They found that:

Those living in rural areas (at 65%) were more likely to oppose SSM
than those in urban areas (at 45%).

58% would support the use of the not
withstanding clause to exempt Alberta in the event that the federal
government redefined marriage to include same-sex couples. At the time
that the poll was taken, most of the public in Alberta were probably
unaware that the not withstanding clause cannot be used by a provincial
government in a case where they have no jurisdiction.

On a related matter, 56% of Albertans agreed that "we should be
more tolerant of people who choose to live according to their own moral
standards even if these are very different from our own" Also, 27%
were opposed, 14% were neutral, 3% didn't answer. The percentage who
agreed with the statement dropped from 69% in 2002-APR to 56% in
2003-JUL -- a drop of 13 percentage points in a little over a year.

The poll was taken between 2003-JUN-26 and 30 among a randomly selected
group of 800 adult Albertans. Margin of error = 3.5 percentage point. 12

2004-DEC-09: Notwithstanding clause abandoned: The Supreme Court
of Canada ruled on DEC-08 that the federal government has sole jurisdiction
in deciding who is eligible to marry in Canada. Alberta Justice Minister Rob
Stevens responded to this ruling. He said that if the federal government
legalizes SSM, his province would not invoke the
notwithstanding clause in order to retain the one-man one woman
definition of marriage in Alberta. Premier Ralph Klein had suggested in the
past that he would invoke this clause. It is no longer an option. Steven
said: "You cannot use the notwithstanding clause relative to a matter
that is not within your jurisdiction. Since the court ruled the authority
over same-sex marriage falls to the federal government, it is only the
federal government who can invoke the notwithstanding clause to maintain the
traditional definition of marriage. The court clearly said that provinces
could not refuse to issue licenses or register same-sex marriages." He
expressed the belief that most Albertans oppose SSM. He said: "There are
differing views on this point, but my own sense of it is that in Alberta, as
of today, the majority of Albertans are in support of the traditional
definition of marriage." His assessment is probably accurate. A
poll in 2003-AUG showed that 46% of Canadian
adults favor SSM and 46% are opposed. But only 33% of adults in the Prairies
favor SSM. Stevens said: "The definition of marriage in this province is
the traditional one. And so a same-sex couple that would seek a marriage
license today in Alberta would be declined." 6

2004-DEC-10: Referendum: Alberta premier Ralph Klein called for a
national referendum on same-sex marriage. In a TV interview he said that he
was "thoroughly disappointed" that the Supreme Court of Canada
ruled that the federal government's proposed revisions to the marriage act
are constitutional. He also said that "In this province, my feeling is
the majority -- and I don't know what the percentage of the majority is --
but the majority of people are opposed to same-sex marriage. And I represent
the people of this province.'' A referendum would be an unusual step.
Some have been conducted in the past: Newfoundland and Labrador held a
referendum in which the public voted to join Canada. The people of Quebec
have voted down two referenda on whether to separate from Canada. Klein
suggested that: "There is very little legally we can do about it, but
there is a lot politically."

2004-DEC-10: Legal challenge: A gay-positive group is planning to
challenge the province's marriage act.SpokespersonMurray
Billet of Canadians for Equal Marriage in Edmonton said: "The
essence of the challenge is going to be discrimination based on sexual
orientation. They suggest marriage continues to be between a man and a
woman, when the Supreme Court and other jurisdictions have stated very
clearly otherwise.''

2004-DEC-12: Prime minister rejects referendum: Prime Minister
Paul Martin rejected the concept of a referendum on SSM. He said: "I
think that this is an issue that Parliamentarians ought to decide...The
courts have now given their direction. I think it's one for Parliament and I
think that Parliament ought to accept their responsibility."
6 Even though a sizeable
majority of Canadian adults favor SSM, a referendum would almost certainly
reject SSM. This is because many of those who reject SSM are very strongly
opposed; they would be very likely to vote in a referendum. Many of those
who favor SSM are not so highly motivated and thus would be less likely to
vote.

2004-DEC-22: Beliefs about SSM: The SSM situation in Alberta
seems to be building up a head of steam. Battle lines are being drawn. On
one side are social and religious conservatives who strongly advocate
retaining "traditional marriage." -- i.e. promoting the
continuing restriction of marriage to the union of one man and one woman, and prohibiting
same-sex couples from marrying. On the other side are some religious
liberals, civil libertarians, and homosexuals who view SSM primarily as a
civil rights issue.

Premier Ralph Klein said earlier in December that SSM is morally wrong,
His government will not allow them in spite of a decision by the Supreme
Court of Canada on DEC-08 which ruled them constitutional, and rulings by
many provincial and territorial supreme courts which determined that "traditional
marriage" is unconstitutional.

Numerous religious and social conservatives and groups have condemned
SSM as a threat to marriage and to the stability of society. They have
cited dozens of reasons for these beliefs.

Some gay and lesbian groups maintain that Alberta's opposition to SSM
resembles discriminatory laws which were once faced
by Jews and non-whites around the world. This comment might have
referred to the infamous head tax that the federal government once charged
Chinese immigrants in the early 20th century.

Julie Lloyd, a human rights lawyer in the province said: "I have
heard the premier of Alberta describe the issue as a moral issue, and I
agree. However, the moral issue is not and cannot be homosexuality. The
moral issue is discrimination."

Murray Billet, spokesperson for Canadians for Equal Marriage,
said that gays and lesbians "...not only expect equality, but we will go
after equality and do whatever it is going to take. We will take them to
court. The writing is on the wall. Get over it.''

Michael Phair, an Edmonton city councilor who is gay, said: "We are
tired of being bullied. It is an outrage, and it is nothing but bias and
revenge to force us to go to the courts to get what everyone else has in
this country.'' This statement is factually incorrect. About 13% of
Canadians live in areas where SSM is currently unavailable; roughly 10% in
Alberta and 3% in two maritime provinces.

Kris Wells, an educator said: "Mr. Klein's rhetoric gives people the
tacit permission that it is OK to discriminate. When these kinds of negative
comments are profiled in the media, we know that the rate of victimization
against lesbian and gay persons increases.''

Human rights activist Elizabeth Massiah said that Alberta's gays and
lesbians want full equality. She said: "What Ralph is proposing is a
version of apartheid. I don't want to live in a province where there is an
apartheid or caste-like system of equality.''

Marisa Etmanksi, a spokesperson for the premier said that Klein will meet
with a representative of the gay and lesbian community during 2005-JAN. She
said: "Premier Klein has agreed to meet with a member of that group. They
can get together and discuss issues that are important to both groups."
Referring to communications received from the general public, she said: "The
overwhelming response has come from people supporting the premier and the
government on his stand.''

2005-JAN-15:
Bishop condemns
SSM: Roman Catholic bishop,Frederick B. Henry of Calgary, Alberta issued a pastoral
letter condemning SSM. He told his parishioners that the goal of the
homosexual movement is not simply to obtain the various rights and
obligations of marriage. It is a "...powerful psychological weapon to
change society’s rejection of homosexual activity and lifestyle into
gradual, even if reluctant, acceptance." In a remarkable statement, he
writes: "Since homosexuality, adultery, prostitution and pornography
undermine the foundations of the family, the basis of society, then the
State must use its coercive power to proscribe or curtail them in the
interests of the common good. It is sometimes argued that what we do in the
privacy of our home is nobody’s business. While the privacy of the home is
undoubtedly sacred, it is not absolute. Furthermore, an evil act remains an
evil act whether it is performed in public or in private." It is
unclear exactly what type of government oppression of gays, lesbians and
bisexuals he is advocating. He may be in favor of the re-criminalization of
all same-sex behavior. We have asked for a clarification from the Diocese of
Alberta.

He suggests that same-sex marriage is not an actual marriage because the
couple, on their own, cannot procreate. For example, lesbian couples would
have to resort to in-vitro fertilization or artificial insemination just as
infertile opposite-sex couples must in order to have children. (Both
procedures are forbidden by the Roman Catholic church.) "Two individuals
of the same sex, regardless of their race, wealth, stature, erudition or
fame, will never be able to marry because of an insurmountable biological
impossibility." We assume that he is stating that a same-sex couple will
never be able to marry in the Roman Catholic Church. Such couples have been
marrying by the thousands in civil and in religious ceremonies conducted by
liberal faith groups. He urges his parishioners to communicate their
rejection of SSM to their members of Parliament. 4,9 More details

2005-MAR-23: Alberta's Marriage Act set to
expire but may be renewed: The Marriage Amendment Act, which forms part
of the province's Marriage Act, defines marriage as a union between a man and
a woman. It also contains a "notwithstanding"
clause that its sponsors believed would retain this definition, even if the
Federal Government redefined the federal marriage act to allow same-sex
couples to marry in Canada. There are two problems with this amendment:

Notwithstanding clauses have an automatic
five-year expiry date that make them null and void after five years. The
clause expires during the week of 2005-MAR-20.

The clause is meaningless, because the Supreme
Court of Canada has ruled that it is the federal government, not the
provinces, who has total jurisdiction over whom may marry in Canada. Alberta
has no say in the matter. The federal government could decide to violate the
Charter of Rights and Freedoms by restricting marriage to
opposite-sex couples by using the notwithstanding clause. However, a
province does not have jurisdiction.

A poll commissioned by the Canadian Family
Action Coalition and conducted by the Feedback Research Corporation
found that 63% of Alberta adults favored renewing the notwithstanding clause
for another five years; 30% supported its automatic expiry. Justice Minister
Ron Stevens announced that he intended to let the notwithstanding clause
expire because, in his estimation, there was a "99.9% chance" it
would not survive a court challenge. Premier Ralph Klein endorsed Steven's
decision on 2005-MAR-16. However, Klein's caucus disagreed. Klein said in an
interview with Canadian Press: "Caucus did not
buy that. They bought the political argument that even if it is moot and
even if it can't be used, we ought to leave it as it is. That is, to leave
it in the legislation and wait and see what the feds do relative to Bill
C-38." Brian Rushfeldt, executive director of the Canada Family
Action Coalition, told the Calgary Herald that: "It's a
victory for the people of Alberta and certainly for those who want marriage
to remain the same." 7

2005-APR-04:
Conservatives abandon notwithstanding clause: TheGovernment
Services Minister, Ty Lund, tabled a report at the conservative caucus. It
stated that the federal government, not the provinces, has the exclusive
jurisdiction to define who in Canada can marry. If Alberta renewed the
expired clause in the Alberta Marriage Act which defines marriage as a union
of one man and one woman by using the notwithstanding clause, the government
would be needlessly wasting time and money. They would certainly lose any
court challenge. The caucus decided to abandon their effort. Ralph Klein, premier of Alberta, told reporters: "I had to put my foot
down today. You can't incorporate into a law something that is unlawful,
something that simply cannot be enforced." According to Graham Thomson,
"The government is now looking at other options. One of them involves
getting out of the marriage business altogether. The province would simply
stop solemnizing marriages, leaving that up to religious groups. The
province would limit itself to issuing licences for civil unions. The
marriage ceremony would be the icing on the cake, something not necessary
but performed for the benefit of the couple and up to the discretion of a
church or temple. It is a worthy idea, one that respects the rights of just
about everybody involved in this issue. It's not a new idea, but Klein's
MLAs finally seem to be listening. They're facing in the right direction
after performing more flips than an Olympic gymnast." 8

2005-JUL-20: First SSM license issued:
Keenan Carley and Robert
Bradford became the first couple in Alberta, and thus probably the first
couple in Canada, to take advantage of the new law. They arrived at a provincial
registry office less than an hour after the Act had been given royal assent. They
had to wait until the provincial government faxed a memo to all registry
offices telling them to go ahead and issue marriage licenses to same-sex
couples. The staff changed the titles "Bride" and "Groom" to "Partner 1" and
"Partner 2." They couple expect to marry in
early September. There were probably dozens of other same-sex couples who
purchased marriage licenses on that day across Canada, but the others were believed to be in a
province or territory where SSM was already available due to a court order. 10

Afterwards, Carley said: "It's
wonderful feeling to know that it can finally be official." Bradley added:
"It means that when we do have that ceremony, it will be legal, that we will
be recognized as a married couple by the province of Alberta and the
government of Canada. And that's a great thing." 11

According to CTV.ca:

"Alberta Premier Ralph Klein says it's a sad day for the majority of
Albertans who believe in the traditional definition of marriage, but his
government must 'obey the law of the land'.''

"Klein says the Alberta government has always believed that gays should
be protected against discrimination. But Klein says 'when it comes to
marriage, we draw the line'.'" 11

2005-AUG-08: Poll indicates Albertans still
opposed to SSM: The Ipsos-Reid North America
polling organization, reported the results of a survey of public
opinion in Alberta. They found that a slight majority (56%) of Albertan
adults remain opposed to same-sex marriage. 12 This is a
reduction from 57% over a two year period, when compared to the results of a
poll announced on 2003-JUL-17.13Alberta
and Prince Edward Island have
historically been the provinces whose adults are most opposed to equal
rights for their gay and lesbian citizens.